4.6 Article

Structure of the Type VI Effector-Immunity Complex (Tae4-Tai4) Provides Novel Insights into the Inhibition Mechanism of the Effector by Its Immunity Protein

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 288, 期 8, 页码 5928-5939

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M112.434357

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2012CB917203]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [10979005, 31200552]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The type VI secretion system (T6SS), a multisubunit needle-like apparatus, has recently been found to play a role in interspecies interactions. The Gram-negative bacteria harboring T6SS (donor) deliver the effectors into their neighboring cells (recipient) to kill them. Meanwhile, the cognate immunity proteins were employed to protect the donor cells against the toxic effectors. Tae4 (type VI amidase effector 4) and Tai4 (type VI amidase immunity 4) are newly identified T6SS effector-immunity pairs. Here, we report the crystal structures of Tae4 from Enterobacter cloacae and Tae4-Tai4 complexes from both E. cloacae and Salmonella typhimurium. Tae4 acts as a DL-endopeptidase and displays a typical N1pC/P60 domain. Unlike Tsi1 (type VI secretion immunity 1), Tai4 is an all-helical protein and forms a dimer in solution. The small angle x-ray scattering study combined with the analytical ultracentrifugation reveal that the Tae4-Tai4 complex is a compact heterotetramer that consists of a Tai4 dimer and two Tae4 molecules in solution. Structure-based mutational analysis of the Tae4-Tai4 interface shows that a helix (alpha 3) of one subunit in dimeric Tai4 plays a major role in binding of Tae4, whereas a protruding loop (L4) in the other subunit is mainly responsible for inhibiting Tae4 activity. The inhibition process requires collaboration between the Tai4 dimer. These results reveal a novel and unique inhibition mechanism in effector-immunity pairs and suggest a new strategy to develop antipathogen drugs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据